50 inch Plasma TVs

_Stryker writes "Pioneer has a new 50 inch TV that would look great hanging on my wall. Did I mention that it is only 4 inches thick! Imagine playing (insert favorite game here) on this bad boy! " Ya know, I predict that in the future, we'll need fewer posters.

$25,000 ... *sigh*

[torpor]

What's it going to take for these things to become affordable to real people?

Hang it on a wall?

[Millennium]

For crying out loud, the thing ways 95 pounds. What were you planning to hang it with? You'd have to almost literally bolt the thing down. This, of course, assumes the heat of a plasma monitor hanging on the wall didn't burn the house down.

Nonetheless, it's a cool idea. I just wish they wouldn't give people crazy ideas like hanging it on a wall. But hey, when that monitor drops to a reasonable price, I'll be first in line to buy one.

Awfully low resolution for something this big.

[daviddennis]

1024x768?

Faugh.

I get 1280x1024 on my 19" Sony, and I could probably go up to 1600x1200 if my video card could handle it.

I must admit a lust for Sony's new flat screen TV, which has a stunning picture, but it's $ 1,900, not $ 25,000.

D

I dunno...

[lungofish]

We recently bought a a flat panel display
at work, and it's been a major pain in the
ass. The technology has some pretty severe
handicaps. Like the fact that you can't tip
them more than a few degrees off vertical,
or you'll blow the display (even when off).
And unlike most displays made in the past
10 or so years, they will burn in, so don't
leave them hooked up to a windows machine
overnight, because when the screensaver bsod's,
you're going to be reading that debugger
info for weeks to come.

And this one costs $25,000! There are already
several companies that make 50 inch flat panels,
and they're all orders of magnitude cheaper.
Maybe for your 25,000 smackers you can acutally
tip this one on its side for a couple of seconds.
They don't mention that on the website.

I think large panel LCD displays are more likely
to be the future of flat panel displays, not
plasma. IMHO, that is.

Still, it is pretty cool looking, once you've
hung its 100 pounds on the wall with
a dozen togglebolts, and the drywall holds.

-Lungo

Typical marketing B.S.

[tgd]

Sure, a flat-panel 50 inch screen is nice, they say its HD upgradable, but for $25k I'd expect an HD upgradable to be able to actually do HD resolution. 1280x768 isn't.

Doesn't mean I won't accept it if someone was to give me one. :)

How is this different than Phillips' FlatTV

[ksheff]

I think it had the ability to be used as a computer monitor. I also thought the different display modes for letterbox movies and the ability to show two channels side by side were interesting.

$25,000 ... *sigh*

[palpatine]

That's because real people buy these horrid steeltraps called cars. And what's this about useless jewelry and aweful huge houses with grass? People should set their priorities straight.

I lust, but it's not enough (res too low)

[incubus]

1024x768... or even 1280x768... both, though pretty cool on monitors of 21" or less, would probably fail to look great on a 50" screen...
I would want more window space! *but*.. this is a great leap forward... that thing is THIN! :-)

Very limited quality

[gavinhall]

Posted by K8_Fan:

I have some experience with these, and I do not consider them watchable. The principle reason is that the plasma cells do not respond fast enough to provide 24-bit color depth. The ones I've seen at the Consumer Electronica Show and at the dealerships appear to be limited to 16-bit. Also, the factory settings are pushed way beyond reasonable performance. Wonderful if you enjoy dither patterns and mach banding.

The cost, the cost

[Jeremy Erwin]

Well, frankly, at 25,000 smackers, it's only something to drool over. And if it's not worth "drooling" over, it's not worth $25000. Just think of the SGI/Beowolf/Mahogany veneer computer that could be had for such a price...

Frankly, I find the television adverts for such things are a bit ludicrous, as I doubt there are very many "hip" 18-25 year olds with enough money to buy a $7K HDTV, much less a $25K medium-definition flatscreen.

The cost, the cost

[Jeremy Erwin]

#!/usr/bin/sarcasm
Oh. $15K is a lot more resonable. But I had my heart set on a widescreen to watch "Flipper."

I lust, but it's not enough (res too low)

[Fastolfe]

You guys aren't going to be sitting right up against one of these things either. (Well, I don't know, maybe you are). I think you're meant to sit back from these a few feet (like TV-watching distance), which makes this resolution perfect (the latter even more so, since it takes advantage of the wide aspect ratio).

NTSC

[gavinhall]

Posted by shindogu:

It's not going to work in europe...

everything is PAL, and the thing can only be hooked up to something NTSC...

I'll be sticking to the beamer..

Sony is cooler

[ant]

Sony has a 50 inch diagonal lcd for $6000... it only does 1024x768... but for that price difference....

Xerox already developed flat screens at 300dpi

[Julz]

I saw the Sony Flat Screen Tv last weekend and it was pretty impressive. Although it's $17000NZD. 1st division Lotto would be good or a bonus!

Anyway Xerox has already developed at Flat screen capable of 300dpi. Now this is cool.

XRCE: Flat Panel Display Interface [xerox.com]